He calls Christian believers (by inference), “our own religious lunatics,” for instance.

sanantonian on January 7, 2008 at 8:22 PM

Inference, yes. Yours!

We most certainly have had our own religious lunatics, unless you thought David Koresh was a sweetheart.

Leave being prickly and inflammatory to the Muslims. They’re better at it.

I wonder, is that how you also refer to readers like me when you get alone with your atheist friends? (I’m shocked, SHOCKED!)

Still, I give him very high marks for clearly seeing the real and present danger posed by radical Islam.

Perhaps some liberals will listen to him!

CanadaCees
Vancouver, BC
Canada

The modern incarnation of the left will share the fate of its antecedents the Girondists.

It’s simply a question of when they’ll be separated from their heads.

Warner: Political Islam has annihilated every culture it has invaded or immigrated to. The total time for annihilation takes centuries, but once Islam is ascendant it never fails. The host culture disappears and becomes extinct.
shooter on January 7, 2008 at 3:21 PM

Thanks for a link to the most profound article

There is no such thing as a universal statement of ethics in Islam. Muslims are to be treated one way and unbelievers another way. The closest Islam comes to a universal statement of ethics is that the entire world must submit to Islam. After Mohammed became a prophet, he never treated an unbeliever the same as a Muslim. Islam denies the truth of the Golden Rule.

By the way, this dualistic ethic is the basis for jihad. The ethical system sets up the unbeliever as less than human and therefore, it is easy to kill, harm or deceive the unbeliever. Warner from the article

A brilliant analysis of the European immigration invasion disastor. The western cultures honor the Lamb yet they import, protect and unleash the prolific Lion. The Lamb devours only its own, while the Lion devours everything outside the pride.

Should the law protect a religion that requires the murder of all other religions?

Our problem is lies, lies and more semantics and until we are honest about this conundrum, we are in grave danger of extinction

Eeeeeeeeeek! Atheists! Somebody get me a chair to climb up on!

thejackal on January 7, 2008 at 6:17 PM

You presume they frighten me. Not at all. They’re mostly effete — intellectual and moral castrates. Those who frighten me are the dupes who assume there is wisdom residing in the minds of those who, again — in a better age, were known as fools.

2Brave2Bscared on January 7, 2008 at 6:10 PM

That’s exactly it. Again, James Burnham laid it out years ago. Liberalism always ends with suicide. It has no other destiny. And the “intolerance” (or “fascist”) card will always be played as Esthier and peski try above. The left also uses this as their MO. Strange bedfellows? Not at all in a political culture that sees the state as being omniscient and omnipotent. Things are playing out exactly as better minds predicted they would.

But Harris is a good guy, no doubt.

Hitchens and Harris are as much of a threat to the West as is Islam.

Drum on January 7, 2008 at 4:15 PM

Drum, are you even old enough to be drinking?!

AP/UPI (New York) PANDEMONIUM has broken out today as the streets of NY fill up with revellers on hearing the news that Radical Islam has finally been defeated. Regrettably, ten seconds later it was revealed that Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris have declared war on Western Civilization.

Mr. Hitchens, who now calls himself Bartender-For-Life, claimed that “until all people everywhere divest their religious views, I will remain half-plastered, and the other half will write erudite books for sofa-ridden intellectuals who likewise gargle with Russian mouthwash and potato-juice for breakfast. There. I have decreed it (hic!).”

Mr. Harris was not available for comment as he was too busy pumping paintballs into St. Christopher’s Cathedral.

********

Eeeeeeeeeek! Atheists! Somebody get me a chair to climb up on!

Sam Harris knows little about Christianity (no more than the average churchgoer. He’s certainly not an expert.)

His knowledge of Islam, by his own admission, is insuficient to speak on it, yet here he is.

A fool.

mofo on January 7, 2008 at 2:54 PM

I have no doubt that Harris could out quote you on the bible and squander any attempt that you could muster to defend it’s message and context. The plain truth is that all religions are premised on fallices and contradict themselves on a multitude of levels. Yes, Harris is monotone.. I’d take that over a charismatic charlatan anyday.

Gerard on January 7, 2008 at 5:39 PM

I agree with you,but I suspect the problem goes even deeper into the “progressive” psyche than that.

Over the years I’ve spent observing Homo Sapiens Liberalis in its natural habitat (I turn 50 this month), I’ve evolved two hypotheses to attempt to explain the progressives’ seeming determination to wreck Western Civilization. They are;

1. The Nomad Syndrome; This hypothesis postulates that progressives believe that our society could be made perfect, if we (everyone else) simply (a) gave them absolute, unchallengeable, and irrevocable power over us, (b) did exactly what they told us to when they told us to do it, and (c) never, ever talked back to them. Instead, we rarely grant them even limited power, and we are constantly “talking back”, telling them they’re wrong, etc. From which they have concluded that we are consciously refusing to become “perfect”. And since we are refusing perfection, we must be destroyed to make way for a truly perfect culture- which they are certain they can build on the ruins of, well, the rest of us. (Syndrome name derived from the Original Series Star Trek episode, “The Changeling”.)

2. The Manson Syndrome; In Helter Skelter, his book on the Manson “family” and the Tate/LaBianca mass murder case, prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi described Charles Manson’s “plan”, of which the murders were part. Manson, a schizoid personality case if there ever was one, believed that the murders would be blamed on “black radicals”, resulting in oppression of African-Americans. Who would then rebel, and destroy the “white power structure”. But then, Manson (being a thoroughgoing racist in addition to everything else) believed that African-Americans would be intellectually incapable of running the world. At which point Manson would appear out of the desert as a new Messiah and run it for them. And that they would recognize his “innate superiority” and immediately obey his every whim.

Yes, Manson was (and is) a narcissistic egotist with a serious problem maintaining contact with objective reality. But the point is that modern-day “progressives” suffer from as similarly delusional set of beliefs about the Islamists. They believe that after the “Islamist Triumph”, said “holy warriors” will literally be too stupid to run the world- and will be very grateful to the “enlightened progressives” who will magnanimously offer to do that little job for them.

They also believe that they will be able to exercise such fine control over the events leading up to said Triumph that they will survive it, even if the rest of us do not- as quite a few of the more radically-nihilistic ones hope we do not.

To judge from Harris’ interview, I suspect he may be one of the few “progressives” who may dimly realize the innate fallacy of the cherished dreams of some of his more radical fellow “philosophers” on the left.

And the actual size of the abyss which, even now, may be yawning at the feet of Western Civilization as a consequence of their actions.

clear ether

eon

One of the stupidest comments I’ve read on this board in months. Agree or disagree with them, their just talking and writing, not chopping peoples heads off, killing their daughters for showing their hair, raping and stoning women for sitting in cars with men, torturing and hanging homosexuals and the claiming that homosexualism doesn’t exist in their society.

You’re right; they prefer killing them before they even have a chance to grow hair in the first place. So much more humane that way.

You act as if the actions of liberals have no ill effects on the culture around them. Liberals control our government, our academia and much of our media. To say that “their (they’re) just talking and writing” suggests that words and ideas have no influence on the populace to which they’re directed. Reality says otherwise.

You fail to realize that the primary reason we in the West have this problem of Muslim violence in our streets is because we have been practicing liberal immigration policies for the last 40+ years. We open the floodgates to every Third World people/culture that wants to walk through it, regardless of how dangerous and incompatible they may be with Western civilization at large, and then we turn around and wonder in oblivious disbelief at just how we got ourselves into such a precarious predicament.

Muslims can’t compete with the West militarily. They can’t compete with us economically. We’re smarter than they are, and our civilization is much more advanced. If not for the prevailing multicultural and egalitarian liberal thought that has allowed them a strong foothold within our societies, they would be a manageable, yet still somewhat dangerous, outside threat. But as it stands now, Europe is but a mere generation or two from being completely overtaken by Muslims, simply through sheer numbers — and all with nary a single shot being fired.

And yet to you, the very notion that liberalism (the disease) is just as dangerous, if not more so, to the survival of Western civilization as Islam (the symptom), is “stupid.” Perhaps you should try expanding your horizons.

That’s a tad fascist, don’t you think? And by “a tad” I really mean “completely.”

Fascist? Define “fascist.” If you’re suggesting that I might be intolerant of atheists, you’re wrong. You believe what you believe, and if it’s atheism, I will relegate it to where it belongs — on the fringe. Or will that not be allowed? Not democratic enough for you? Maybe you’re the fascist?

The treatises devised by Al Qaeda’s theoretician, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and the screeds written by its corpulent Lord Haw-Haw, demonstrate how heavily it draws upon neo-Marxist semiotics and language, or the tropes of “anti-imperialist” authors.

If you exclude the perfunctory condemnations of our culture’s alleged licentiousness, nearly all of the appeals to Americans are cast in terms that would be embraced by Eric Foner or the late Edward Said.

I’m sure some leftists have the faculties to discern the difference between OBL and genuine socialists, but many of them don’t see why that should stop the two from working towards a common goal, i.e. the destruction of the West.

Pretty much, yeah.

Drum on January 7, 2008 at 5:23 PM

That’s a tad fascist, don’t you think? And by “a tad” I really mean “completely.”

Yeah I get it. Believe in God or be relegated to the fringes with pedophiles.

peski on January 7, 2008 at 4:59 PM

Pretty much, yeah.

I fail to see how that excludes the BNP and Vlaams Belang as legitimate partners in the fight against Islam. After all, your logic suggests that two competing worldviews can share a common goal on a specific issue without one or both parties endorsing the other’s full catalog of political beliefs.

2Brave2Bscared on January 7, 2008 at 4:31 PM

Correct. Caveat: not in a cases. :-)

I think I’ve been reading too much Sowell.

Perhaps not Osama himself, but some of his savvier underlings? Definitely. If you go back and look at some of the early writings of Rashid Rida or other modern Islamist ideologues you’ll see how heavily they were influenced by Marx, and subsequently, the rise of Bolshevism.

As for the anti-American, international left I don’t think there’s any question that its adherents-if not leaders-are operating under the delusion that Osama & Co. are just another avatar of the People’s Liberation Army, or the NLF.

I recall a discussion on The Guardian’s execrable CiF where one of these numbskulls analogized the IRI-created Hezbollah to the Wobblies.

The lefties and commies in Iran thought the same in 1979. that didn’t and hasn’t seemed to work for them. The very few that are left in Iran now walk and talk very quietly.

Indeed. But they are denying the very foundation of what keeps us from chopping people’s heads off, etc.

Got it? Good.

Drum on January 7, 2008 at 4:51 PM

Yeah I get it. Believe in God or be relegated to the fringes with pedophiles.

And if you refuse to succumb to their mind set you will be labeled a fascist or worse.

And to anyone that wants to make the claim christen fundamentalist are the same as islmosfacit perhaps they need to take a look at some of the secular fundamentalist {Read chapter 3 of the new thought police by Tammy Bruce}

As for Voeglin, I really have no interest in self-absorbed philosophical circle jerks.

Eggzagly. God (oops, did I say that?) forbid you experience some truth.

Class dismissed.

One of the stupidest comments I’ve read on this board in months. Agree or disagree with them, their just talking and writing, not chopping peoples heads off, killing their daughters for showing their hair, raping and stoning women for sitting in cars with men, torturing and hanging homosexuals and the claiming that homosexualism doesn’t exist in their society.

Indeed. But they are denying the very foundation of what keeps us from chopping people’s heads off, etc.

Got it? Good.

Historical only in that you used the phrase “in better days” to link them with “political deviants, homosexuals, and pedophiles”.

Sorry, but beware of proving yourself as subliterate as our president. I said that those deviants, etc, in better days were relegated to the fringe.